About your Search

20121121
20121129
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)
you've had some tough things to say about congressman peter king, for example. his comments about the pledge. but look specifically to his point. some things do change over the years, the economic problems, for example, that we may have had 20 years ago, 40 years ago, they're different than the economic problems right now. so don't different problems call for different solutions? >> well, what was odd about peter king's comment was look, tax increases slow economic growth. tax increases take resources out of the real economy and allow the government to grow and grow. that's always a bad idea. that's not a good idea some years and a bad idea others. leeches, doctors don't put leeches on people ever, it's wrong. don't do it. it doesn't make people stronger. raising taxes, taking money out of the economy, damages the economy, kills jobs, reduces opportunities. >> you know, the latest cnn polls that just came out this week say you're wrong. two or three americans, including a majority of republicans, say the fiscal cliff should be addressed with a mix, a mix of spending cuts, yes, but
is not for life. but everybody who signed the pledge, including peter king who tried to weasel out of it, shame on him as the new york sun said today, i hope his wife understands that commitments last a little longer than, than, than two years or something. >> and zoraida, there you have grover norquist -- >> weeks. >> -- of course, from the americans for tax reform throwing out some pretty strong political hyperbole. but the fact of the matter is, as you said, fiscal cliff, 35 days away, and as we've heard from a lot of economists, if congress can't fix this, then we're in a lot of trouble. we can be heading back into recession. >> mark preston live in washington, d.c. thank you for that. so even if democrats and republicans get a spending deal done in time to steer clear of the fiscal cliff, derer thompson says it won't necessarily cure the economy. the senior editor of "the atlantic" joins us live in the next half hour. he has an interesting perspective. >>> ambassador susan rice heads to capitol hill this morning to mend fences with three republican senators. john mccain, lindsey graham and
there and turns out times change. peter king is also saying he's going to go against the pledge who agreed to it years and years and his reasoning that times have changed. here is the caviat . you are a republican and don't want to raise taxes and willing to compromise a bit, the democrats have to compromise with entitlement spending there. is a way here to find common ground and get away from the all or nothing pledges that the american public many of them were upset about the grid lock. >> brian: it is all symbolic. that brings 80 billion a year and would pay ian volving credit but it doesn't touch our deficit or balance our budget and the other thing that is important they have to get something in return. we'll put it up on the clinton rates and not touch medicare or medicaid? it is all part of the deal. >> gretchen: once you get people back to the table. it is it like a marriage, marriages don't work when one party said i will not budge on anything. >> brian: i hope my wife is listening. >> steve: we are in the let's make a deal stage. both sides want to appear flexibility when it come
have been cracking this door a little bit. peter king said over the weekend for instance if i was in congress in 1941 with refrpbl reference to the pledge you made i would have signed a war against japan. i'm not going to attack japan today. the world has changed and the economic situation is different. that from peter kin. about is make it clear, what raising revenues and not tax rates. just on the surface, why do you believe that the door is starting to crack a little bit? why are republicans talking this way? >> two things, the people who are saying that they might vote for a tax increase that bush got talked into in 1990 for return for make believe spending cuts are the same people who said this two years ago, this is a complete media-created frenzy. peter king said this two years ago, lindsey graham said this two years ago. chamblis of georgia said this two years ago. they said all these things all during the negotiations where they tried to undermine where john boehner and mitch mcconnell got 2.5 trillion in spending cuts without a dollar than tax increase and those peop
of an update on the fiscal cliff and the progress that we saw. i have mentioned saxby chambliss and peter king, as well as lindsay gramm, putting distance between themselves and the pledge. with that kind of compromise coming from the republicans, where is the president willing to give? we have been asking over and over about the tax rates and whether he would, instead of increasing tax rates, perhaps settle for closing loopholes. could you tell us more about where the president stands on this? and what kind of confidence you can give the public that this will get done? >> let me start at the top by saying that some of the comments that you mentioned are welcome. they represent what we hope is a difference in tone and approach to these problems, and a recognition that a balanced approach to deficit reduction is the one that is most beneficial for our economy, protect the middle-class, strengthens its, creates levels of opportunity for those who aspire to the middle class to get there. i would also say that the president has made clear that he would not sign a bill that extends the bush era tax
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)